Anne,
I'll continue to use unwrapped arrays, then. Thanks for the confirmation. One other (hopefully last) question that I had was regarding your earlier comment about not using the "nillable" attribute to avoid interoperability issues. I believe you said you the minOccurs/maxOccurs instead. Did you imply that "nillable" shouldn't be used for all ALL elements, or only those that are used to define arrays?
Thanks,
Ryan
-----Original Message-----
From: Anne Thomas Manes [mailto:atmanes_at_gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2005 3:51 PM
To: users_at_jax-rpc.dev.java.net
Subject: Re: Internal wscompile error from custom WSDL
.NET can process both wrapped and unwrapped arrays, and it will
automatically map either one to an array of type (Item[]). Most Java
tools seem to work like JWDSP, so I suggest using unwrapped arrays.
Anne
On 5/8/05, Ryan LeCompte <Ryan.LeCompte_at_pangonetworks.com> wrote:
>
>
> Anne,
>
>
>
> Yes, that was a typo. It should have been <sequence/>. I am now using
> wrappers for both request and response messages. However, for arrays I am
> just using the "unwrapped array convention" for both request and response
> messages like you've indicated. Use of the unwrapped array convention does
> not hurt interoperability, correct? I know that you've shown me both ways to
> define arrays (wrapped vs. unwrapped) -- but I'm not exactly which approach
> you suggest I use to achieve the most interoperability possible.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ryan
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anne Thomas Manes [mailto:atmanes_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2005 11:10 AM
> To: users_at_jax-rpc.dev.java.net
> Subject: Re: Internal wscompile error from custom WSDL
>
>
>
>
>
> Answers inline...
>
>
>
> On 5/8/05, Ryan LeCompte <Ryan.LeCompte_at_pangonetworks.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Anne,
>
> >
>
> > Thank you for the explanation. I have written my WSDL such that all array
>
> > return types use the "unwrapped array convention", and all of the
> arguments
>
> > to my operations use the wrapped convention. All of the service endpoint
>
> > code that is now generated from the WSDL appears to look correct (i.e., no
>
> > use of wrapped types where I would expect them to be their true types,
> like
>
> > Item[] vs. Items). However, I should note that the only way that I could
> get
>
> > the return types to use Item[] vs. Items was when I specified the
> -f:unwrap
>
> > option to wscompile. If I didn't specify that option, then the generated
>
> > code used the wrapped type instead of Item[]. Any ideas why that would be
>
> > the case?
>
>
>
> Don't know. Maybe someone from Sun can answer.
>
>
>
> >
>
> > Also, a couple more questions if you don't mind:
>
> >
>
> > -- I have been defining operations that have no parameters by still using
>
> > the wrapped convention for multiple parameters, however the wrapped
>
> > complexType just has an empty sequence. This appears to be working fine,
> but
>
> > I just wanted to confirm that is the correct approach.
>
> >
>
> > <complexType name="getItemsRequest">
>
> >
>
> > </sequence>
>
> >
>
> > </complexType>
>
>
>
> Yes -- except that it should be <sequence/> rather than </sequence>.
>
>
>
> >
>
> > -- Also, for operations that return a user-defined complex type, such as
>
> > "Item" -- should the message "part" just directly refer to an element that
>
> > is defined like:
>
> >
>
> > <element name="getItemsResponse" type="tns:Item"/>
>
> >
>
> > Or should it refer to an element that wraps an Item? I have been using the
>
> > above way and the generated code correctly uses "Item" as the return type.
>
> > In other words, is the wrapped convention necessary for return types, or
>
> > just operation parameters?
>
>
>
> I recommend that you use the wrappers for both request and response
>
> messages (that's the way .NET does it).
>
>
>
> >
>
> > Thanks,
>
> >
>
> > Ryan
>
> >
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> >
>
> > From: Anne Thomas Manes [mailto:atmanes_at_gmail.com]
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Sent: Friday, May 06, 2005 8:18 PM
>
> >
>
> > To: users_at_jax-rpc.dev.java.net
>
> >
>
> > Subject: Re: Internal wscompile error from custom WSDL
>
> >
>
> > Ryan,
>
> >
>
> > You don't want to use the -f:unwrap option -- that will produce a
>
> > document/literal unwrapped service. And I just realised that this must be
> a
>
> > point of confusion for you. There is a difference between using unwrapped
>
> > arrays versus using the doc/literal unwrapped convention.
>
> >
>
> > As I said before, you should always use the document/literal unwrapped
>
> > convention. It determines whether or not JAX-RPC automatically generates
>
> > wrapper elements for your input and output messages.
>
> >
>
> > Wrapped versus unwrapped arrays refer to whether or not you create an
>
> > element to group a set of repeating elements. Let me explain the
> difference
>
> > between wrapped versus unwrapped arrays.
>
> >
>
> > This is an example of an element (<stuff>) that contains a single element
>
> > (<thing>) plus a wrapped array of items:
>
> >
>
> > <stuff>
>
> >
>
> > <thing>thing</thing>
>
> >
>
> > <items>
>
> >
>
> > <item>some stuff</item>
>
> >
>
> > <item>more stuff</item>
>
> >
>
> > </items>
>
> >
>
> > </stuff>
>
> >
>
> > The <items> element provides a wrapper for the set of repeating <item>
>
> > elements.
>
> >
>
> > It's defined like so:
>
> >
>
> > <element name="stuff">
>
> >
>
> > <complexType>
>
> >
>
> > <sequence>
>
> >
>
> > <element name="thing" type="string"/>
>
> >
>
> > <element name="items" type="tns:ArrayOfItems"/>
>
> >
>
> > </sequence>
>
> >
>
> > </complexType>
>
> >
>
> > </element>
>
> >
>
> > <complexType name="ArrayOfItems">
>
> >
>
> > <sequence>
>
> >
>
> > <element name="item" type="tns:Item" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>
> >
>
> > </sequence>
>
> >
>
> > </complexType>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Notice that we created a type called "tns:ArrayOfItems" for the <items>
>
> > wrapper element. In this case, <items> returns an object of type
>
> > ArrayOfItems rather than Item[].
>
> >
>
> > On the other hand, this is an example of an unwrapped array within the
>
> > <stuff> element:
>
> >
>
> > <stuff>
>
> >
>
> > <thing>thing</thing>
>
> >
>
> > <item>some stuff</item>
>
> >
>
> > <item>more stuff</item>
>
> >
>
> > </stuff>
>
> >
>
> > Notice that there is no wrapper element around the set of items.
>
> >
>
> > It's defined like so:
>
> >
>
> > <element name="stuff">
>
> >
>
> > <complexType>
>
> >
>
> > <sequence>
>
> >
>
> > <element name="thing" type="string"/>
>
> >
>
> > <element name="item" type="tns:Item" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>
> >
>
> > </sequence>
>
> >
>
> > </complexType>
>
> >
>
> > </element>
>
> >
>
> > In this case the <item> elements map to Item[].
>
> >
>
> > Hope this helps,
>
> >
>
> > Anne
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > On 5/6/05, Ryan LeCompte <ryan.lecompte_at_pangonetworks.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > Anne,
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > I'm following your example of how to return arrays from operations as
>
> >
>
> > > opposed to a wrapped data type, however when I run the wscompile
>
> >
>
> > > utility my web service endpoint interfaces are still using the wrapped
>
> >
>
> > > data type and not the regular array type. I'll try to investigate this
>
> >
>
> > > further... I'm wondering if it has something to do with the way I'm
>
> >
>
> > > invoking wscompile, but I'm specifiying the -f:wsi and -f:unwrap
> options.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Also, do you have any recommendations for how to define operations
>
> >
>
> > > using doc/literal that don't accept any parameters? I want to define
>
> >
>
> > > an operation that has a return type but no arguments. Should I define
>
> >
>
> > > a message that has no "part" elements, or should I define a complex
>
> >
>
> > > type that has an empty "sequence"?
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Thanks,
>
> >
>
> > > Ryan
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > -----Original Message-----
>
> >
>
> > > From: Anne Thomas Manes [
>
> > mailto:atmanes_at_gmail.com]
>
> >
>
> > > Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 8:46 PM
>
> >
>
> > > To: users_at_jax-rpc.dev.java.net
>
> >
>
> > > Subject: Re: Internal wscompile error from custom WSDL
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Ryan,
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > I recommend that you always use the wrapped convention. I also
>
> >
>
> > > recommend that you not use nillable="true", because that causes
>
> >
>
> > > interop problems. It's better to say minOccurs="0".
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > If you want your service to accept or return Item[] rather than Items,
>
> >
>
> > > then you must define the input element as a bare array rather than as
>
> >
>
> > > a wrapped array (i.e., don't create an Items type or an arrayOfItems
>
> >
>
> > > element). So for example, if you want the input message to accept
>
> >
>
> > > Item[], define it this way (this is identical to the way I told you to
>
> >
>
> > > describe the output message):
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > <element name="handleItems">
>
> >
>
> > > <complexType>
>
> >
>
> > > <sequence>
>
> >
>
> > > <element name="item" type="tns:Item"
>
> >
>
> > > minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>
> >
>
> > > </sequence>
>
> >
>
> > > </complexType>
>
> >
>
> > > </element>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > For more information about arrays, I suggest you visit this site:
>
> >
>
> > > http://wiki.apache.org/ws/DotNetInteropArrays
>
> >
>
> > > (it's about Axis, but it applies to any JAX-RPC implementation)
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Anne
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > On 5/5/05, Ryan LeCompte <ryan.lecompte_at_pangonetworks.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > > Anne,
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > I was able to follow your suggestion about the return type and I now
>
> >
>
> > > > see
>
> >
>
> > > the
>
> >
>
> > > > return type of the handleItems method to be Item[] instead of the
>
> > "Items"
>
> >
>
> > > > object. I basically added on to Doug's modified Test wsdl where he
>
> >
>
> > > > wanted
>
> >
>
> > > to
>
> >
>
> > > > show me how I could achieve multiple parameters with doc/literal.
>
> >
>
> > > > The current Test.wsdl (which is attached) generates the handleItems
>
> >
>
> > > > method
>
> >
>
> > > with
>
> >
>
> > > > two arguments. However, the first argument is generated as type
> "Items"
>
> >
>
> > > > where ideally it should be "Item[]", just like the return type. Any
>
> >
>
> > > > ideas why it wouldn't be Item[]?
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Also, a more general question.... should I follow the doc/literal
>
> >
>
> > > "wrapped"
>
> >
>
> > > > convention even if I'm not writing an operation with "multiple
>
> > arguments"?
>
> >
>
> > > I
>
> >
>
> > > > did this in a previous WSDL even though it was only taking a single
>
> >
>
> > > > array type argument, and it has worked out fine.
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Thanks!
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Ryan
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > -----Original Message-----
>
> >
>
> > > > From: Anne Thomas Manes [mailto:atmanes_at_gmail.com]
>
> >
>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 4:47 PM
>
> >
>
> > > > To: users_at_jax-rpc.dev.java.net
>
> >
>
> > > > Subject: Re: Internal wscompile error from custom WSDL
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > If you want to build a document/literal service that exposes an
>
> >
>
> > > > interface that takes multiple parameters, then you should use the
>
> >
>
> > > > "wrapped" convention. See my blog entry for more info:
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
> http://atmanes.blogspot.com/2005/03/wrapped-documentliteral-convention.html.
>
> >
>
> > > > The "wrapped" convention is also described in Section 6.4.1 in the
>
> >
>
> > > > JAX-RPC 1.1 spec. The wrapped convention makes document/literal look
>
> >
>
> > > > and feel like rpc/literal, but it's more interoperable (especially
>
> >
>
> > > > with .NET).
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > To return an array of items, try defining the output message like so
>
> >
>
> > > > (using a bare array rather than a wrapped array):
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > <wsdl:message name="handleItemsResponse">
>
> >
>
> > > > <wsd:part name=parameters
>
> > element="xsdns:handleItemsReturn/>
>
> >
>
> > > > <wsdl:message>
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > And define the response element like so:
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > <xsd:element name="handleItemsReturn">
>
> >
>
> > > > <xsd:complexType>
>
> >
>
> > > > <xsd:sequence>
>
> >
>
> > > > <xsd:element name="item" type="xsdns:Item" nillable="false"
>
> >
>
> > > > minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
>
> >
>
> > > > </xsd:sequence>
>
> >
>
> > > > </xsd:complexType>
>
> >
>
> > > > </xsd:element>
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Anne
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > On 5/4/05, Ryan LeCompte <ryan.lecompte_at_pangonetworks.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > I realize that for doc/literal web services you can only have one
>
> > "part"
>
> >
>
> > > > for
>
> >
>
> > > > > each message to be WSI compliant. However, in the Test.wsdl file
>
> >
>
> > > > > that's included in this message.. If you make the getItems
>
> >
>
> > > > > operation return an array of items by adding an "output" element to
>
> > the "handleItems"
>
> >
>
> > > > operation,
>
> >
>
> > > > > it always seems to generate an endpoint interface with "Items" as
>
> >
>
> > > > > the
>
> >
>
> > > > return
>
> >
>
> > > > > type instead of "Item[]". Has anyone come across this before? It
>
> >
>
> > > > > makes
>
> >
>
> > > the
>
> >
>
> > > > > argument Items[] correctly, but not for the return type.
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Thanks,
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Ryan
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > ________________________________
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > From: Ryan LeCompte
>
> > [mailto:ryan.lecompte_at_pangonetworks.com]
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 2:04 PM
>
> >
>
> > > > > To: JAX-RPC
>
> >
>
> > > > > Subject: Internal wscompile error from custom WSDL
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Hello all,
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > I'm running across various issues with the "wscompile" utility in
>
> >
>
> > > > > JWSDP
>
> >
>
> > > > 1.5.
>
> >
>
> > > > > The problem mainly arises when I have a "message" element in my
>
> >
>
> > > > > custom
>
> >
>
> > > > WSDL
>
> >
>
> > > > > that has more than one "part" inner elements (basically I want a
>
> >
>
> > > generated
>
> >
>
> > > > > method with multiple parameters). I've written a simple test WSDL
>
> >
>
> > > > > file
>
> >
>
> > > > that
>
> >
>
> > > > > can be used to illustrate the problem. Note that this is a
>
> >
>
> > > > document/literal
>
> >
>
> > > > > web service that I'm passing as input to wscompile so that the
>
> >
>
> > > > corresponding
>
> >
>
> > > > > Java objects can be generated. The wscompile command that I'm using
>
> > is:
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > wscompile -gen:server -model model -f:wsi -f:unwrap
>
> >
>
> > > > > -f:documentliteral
>
> >
>
> > > > -keep
>
> >
>
> > > > > -s generated -d output/server -verbose -classpath . config.xml
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Note that I want the generated methods to use Item[] for method
>
> >
>
> > > arguments
>
> >
>
> > > > > and not the generated "Items" object. The following WSDL file
>
> >
>
> > > illustrates
>
> >
>
> > > > > the problem. If you take out the "param_two" from the message
>
> >
>
> > > > > "TestWebService_handleItems" then wscompile generates the proper
>
> >
>
> > > > artifacts.
>
> >
>
> > > > > However, if you add an extra parameter ("part_two") as the WSDL is
>
> >
>
> > > > currently
>
> >
>
> > > > > written, then wscompile outputs the following error:
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > [CustomClassGenerator: generating JavaClass for: Item]
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > [CustomClassGenerator: generating JavaClass for: Items]
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > [LiteralObjectSerializerGenerator: writing
>
> > serializer/deserializer
>
> >
>
> > > > > for: Item]
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > [LiteralObjectSerializerGenerator: writing
>
> > serializer/deserializer
>
> >
>
> > > > > for: Items]
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > error: generator error: internal error (should not happen):
>
> >
>
> > > > > tie.generator.002
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Note that it still appears to generate all of the proper Java
>
> >
>
> > > > > artifacts, except now the main endpoint interface that it
>
> >
>
> > > > > generates uses the
>
> >
>
> > > "Items"
>
> >
>
> > > > > object as a parameter instead of "Item[]". Is there something
>
> >
>
> > > > > wrong in
>
> >
>
> > > the
>
> >
>
> > > > > way that I'm writing the WSDL? I've also noticed that if I don't
>
> >
>
> > > > > use the name of the operation as the element name for the "Items"
>
> >
>
> > > > > complex type,
>
> >
>
> > > > then
>
> >
>
> > > > > the generated endpoint interface uses "Items" and not "Item[]".
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Can anyone point me in the right direction here?
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Thank you,
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Ryan
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Test.wsdl:
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <!-
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > File: Test.wsdl
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > -->
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <definitions name="TestWebService"
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > targetNamespace="urn:com.test.webservice/1.0.0/wsdl"
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > xmlns:tns="urn:com.test.webservice/1.0.0/wsdl"
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > xmlns:xsdns="urn:com.test.webservice/1.0.0/types"
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/"
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > xmlns="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/">
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <!-- Types: Provides data type definitions used to
>
> >
>
> > > > > describe
>
> >
>
> > > > the
>
> >
>
> > > > > messages exchanged. -->
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <types>
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <schema
>
> >
>
> > > > > targetNamespace="urn:com.test.webservice/1.0.0/types"
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > xmlns:tns="urn:com.test.webservice/1.0.0/types"
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema">
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <complexType name="Items">
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <sequence>
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <element name="arrayOfItems" type="tns:Item" nillable="false"
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > minOccurs="1" maxOccurs="unbounded">
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > </element>
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > </sequence>
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > </complexType>
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <complexType name="Item">
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <sequence>
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <element name="itemIdentifier" type="string" nillable="false"/>
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > <element name="itemName" type="string" nillable="true"/>
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > </sequence>
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > </complexType>
>
> ...
>
> [Message clipped]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe_at_jax-rpc.dev.java.net
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help_at_jax-rpc.dev.java.net